Death Penalty

[robert2]

The news clippings this week touches the issue of death penalty for some crimes.

I support it. The only problem I have is that someone innocent may die. But I also think it is a nesessary measure.

People who smuggle drugs, human traffickers (sex slave traders), rapists and murderers deserve it.

The opposition against death penalty seems to come mostly from europeans, for whom the death penalty is too harsh. (I live in Europe.)

What do you think?

Death penalty, yes or no ?

[canuckamuck]

We have all already been given the death penalty; some need to have their appointment moved up a bit.

[robert2]

We have all already been given the death penalty; some need to have their appointment moved up a bit.

Fantacstic point.

It's about justice, not revenge.

[jdinasia]

I have absolutely ZERO opinion on the death penalty in Thailand.

[jasreeve17]

My belief is that:-

1 - We are dragged down to the level of the killer, by killing the killer.

2 - I don't trust justice systems to be 100% correct. (I don't trust the Thai justice system to be correct 10% of the time).

3 - I do not have any right to kill another human being, or judge them to be killed.

4 - I cannot trust, or respect, people that choose to kill others.

We do have other choices.

I vote no.

[robert2]

My belief is that:-

1 - We are dragged down to the level of the killer, by killing the killer.

2 - I don't trust justice systems to be 100% correct. (I don't trust the Thai justice system to be correct 10% of the time).

3 - I do not have any right to kill another human being, or judge them to be killed.

4 - I cannot trust, or respect, people that choose to kill others.

We do have other choices.

I vote no.

Thank you for voting.

The reason I made this poll thread is to get an idea of the expat community's opinion about death penalty in general. I have left out a "don't know" option. If you're not sure or have no opinion don't vote.

[khunlungphudhu]

Do not beleive in taking life on any pretext, however I do feel that the deprivation of liberty, espescially for a very long, time could amount to a greater punishment, an execution providing a welcome escape!

[farangsay]

The news clippings this week touches the issue of death penalty for some crimes.

I support it. The only problem I have is that someone innocent may die. But I also think it is a nesessary measure.

People who smuggle drugs, human traffickers (sex slave traders), rapists and murderers deserve it.

Your categories of "capital crimes" are a little catch-all

The opposition against death penalty seems to come mostly from europeans, for whom the death penalty is too harsh. (I live in Europe.)

By all accounts imprisonment in the US can be a fairly horrific way to spend the rest of your

life (and there life can mean life). I think European countries (and I canoot bring to mind one

that still has it) have ended executions on moral grounds.

What do you think?

As you might guess I am undecided (an option you missed in your poll). I have thought that

if ever convicted of a capital crime (even if innocent) I would go out of my way to ensure I

got executed rather than living the rest of my days treated like an animal with the high point

being gang-raped on a nightly basis. Maybe you could do a bit more research on errors of

justice and real conditions of imprisonment in both Western and non-Western countries

before posing such a question in this facile way.

Death penalty, yes or no ?

PS

There were several highly publicised cases in the UK of people being "fitted up" to use

the English term when the police were under pressure to produce a result after some

murderous Provo bombings. I can think of the "Birmingham 6" the "Guilford 4" and

such. It seems that this went as far as concealing disculpatory evidence. I was discussing

this with a retired English policeman in his pub. When I pointed out that not only were

apparently innocent people imprisoned for years the real culprits had escaped punishment

his answer was "yes , well they did something". Should the UK have still had capital

punishment on the books I'm sure some of these people would have qualified.

I have also read of a campaign in the US to revisit convictions using DNA technology

(which was not available at the time of the trial) to clear people of murders and

rape/murders. Some of these people were on death row.

Whilst there are some people who might be considered "too evil to live" I find your

broad-brush simplistic approach invalid.

[Nebukanezar]

I support the death penalty and in fact testified against the man who murdered my first love (and coincidentally 5 other people before and one after her) so that he would face lethal injection.

That doesn't mean I'm blind to the faults of the death penalty, for example in my country (The States) I would be up to 6 times as likely to get the death penalty over a white man for the very same crime just because the color of my skin. In a multicultural country like ours bigotry rears it's vile head in the judicial process and many have died unjustly. However the system only gets better through constant improvement not abandonment of what is essentially a good idea.

Some people need to die and it is indeed a undesirable task for anyone no matter how hardened and fair to cull the dregs but someone has to do it.

[cdnvic]

I don't have any moral objection to someone forfeiting their life if they murder, rape, commit high treason, etc.

However, I have no confidence in any justice system's ability to avoid convicting the wrong person. Too may people have been wrongly convicted of capital crimes over the years, and while you can apologize and try to compensate someone who is wrongly imprisoned, why can you do for the wrongly executed?

As for the usual "It costs ______ to keep a person in jail" argument, what does it say about you that you are willing to kill someone for the sake of it being cost effective?

Edited March 30, 2007 by cdnvic

[farangsay]

I don't have any moral objection to someone forfeiting their life if they murder, rape, commit high treason, etc.

However, I have no confidence in any justice system's ability to avoid convicting the wrong person. Too may people have been wrongly convicted of capital crimes over the years, and while you can apologize and try to compensate someone who is wrongly imprisoned, why can you do for the wrongly executed?

As for the usual "It costs ______ to keep a person in jail" argument, what does it say about you that you are willing to kill someone for the sake of it being cost effective?

Well Vic I would have endorsed your post 100% were it not for your inclusion of "high treason , etc."

I am not going to nit-pick about murderers and rapists which is a bit broad brush but my grandfather

narrowly escaped summary execution for "treason" in 1921 by a few tans who dragged him out of

his premises for that purpose. Ironicly it was Brit officer arriving on the scene who restrained them.

If I wanted to be facetious I would ask if you regret the survival of George Washington et al , but

I don't so I wont.

[lburry]

Do not beleive in taking life on any pretext, however I do feel that the deprivation of liberty, espescially for a very long, time could amount to a greater punishment, an execution providing a welcome escape!

I'm in total agreement here.

I'm not a church attending member but I believe in my God. I think that no mortal being should be allowed to judge another human. We didn't create life nor should we be privileged to terminate it.

I think that criminal reform in the penitentiaries should be reversed. Prison should be for punishment, not reform. The criminal should be forced to serve society performing undesirable duties that are needed by our citizens. Chain gangs should be return to those who commit capital offenses. We should provide the basic necessities to prisoners but remove their right to entertainment, pursuit of frivilous litigation, social occasions (conjugal visits, etc), and voting privileges, to name a few. If a convicted felon wants reform, let them pay their dues with sweat and hard labor in order to pay for these privileges.

A long life of punishment is more just than execution. Just my two cents.....

[farangsay]

Do not beleive in taking life on any pretext, however I do feel that the deprivation of liberty, espescially for a very long, time could amount to a greater punishment, an execution providing a welcome escape!

I'm in total agreement here.

I'm not a church attending member but I believe in my God. I think that no mortal being should be allowed to judge another human. We didn't create life nor should we be privileged to terminate it.

I think that criminal reform in the penitentiaries should be reversed. Prison should be for punishment, not reform. The criminal should be forced to serve society performing undesirable duties that are needed by our citizens. Chain gangs should be return to those who commit capital offenses. We should provide the basic necessities to prisoners but remove their right to entertainment, pursuit of frivilous litigation, social occasions (conjugal visits, etc), and voting privileges, to name a few. If a convicted felon wants reform, let them pay their dues with sweat and hard labor in order to pay for these privileges.

A long life of punishment is more just than execution. Just my two cents.....

I note your location as Oklahoma. That is in the US but is it on the same planet I inhabit?

I fear you are confusing conditions in the so-called "country club" prisons with the living

conditions of the average joe-soap prison inmate.

I don't really know where to start with you.

Incarceration should be about punishment not reform.

OK. If a "felon wants reform" he should be chained whilst performing slave labor ?

You saw "Cool Hand Luke" and you identified with the "sleepy eyed psychotic"

prison boss maybe ?

OK provocation over.

Would you not agree that there is a middle road here which would permit incarcerated

felons to earn cigarette and candy money plus a certain amount of self-respect (I do

believe there are certain inmates who have never experienced a normal work

environment) and at the same time permit the state to alleviate the cost of incarceration ?

I should add as a disclaimer that I have NO experience with penal systems anywhere

(not yet anyway).

PS Aren't convicted felons denied the vote in the US ?

[garro]

I am 100% against the death sentence and in my view anyone who helps out with these executions, or orders them, has commited murder. Often these murders occur for political reasons and I think this is especially true in the states where some politicians wish to appear tough on crime. The legal system does not order rapists to be raped or drunk drivers to be knocked down by other drunk drivers so why should murderers be murdered. The legal sytem should be about protecting society from danger and not as a system of revenge.

I also feel sickened by the obvious relish that the members of some societies seem to take in these executions. It is natural that victims of crimes want revenge but I don't think this want should be encouraged.

In my view executions are a demonstration of man's vilest tendencies.

[garro]

I know that many will dislike me for saying this but I also feel that supporters of the death penality also have blood on their hands. This is my opinion.

[bmanly]

I ran a poll on TV on the very same question, in the end the vote was 50% yes and 50% no. You can check the results at this link.

I am against it and voted no.

[Flysiam]

I don't have any moral objection to someone forfeiting their life if they murder, rape, commit high treason, etc.

However, I have no confidence in any justice system's ability to avoid convicting the wrong person. Too may people have been wrongly convicted of capital crimes over the years, and while you can apologize and try to compensate someone who is wrongly imprisoned, why can you do for the wrongly executed?

As for the usual "It costs ______ to keep a person in jail" argument, what does it say about you that you are willing to kill someone for the sake of it being cost effective?

Well Vic I would have endorsed your post 100% were it not for your inclusion of "high treason , etc."

I am not going to nit-pick about murderers and rapists which is a bit broad brush but my grandfather

narrowly escaped summary execution for "treason" in 1921 by a few tans who dragged him out of

his premises for that purpose. Ironicly it was Brit officer arriving on the scene who restrained them.

If I wanted to be facetious I would ask if you regret the survival of George Washington et al , but

I don't so I wont.

I have little confidence in any justice system in existence but I do/would support the death penalty insofar as it would/could be handed out to one convicted of a deserving crime. I would also add 'high treason' to that list. Someone committing treason could effectively cause the loss of life to many, many innocent people - that being the case, would probably deserve it. Death sentences are handed down on a case by case basis and one never seems to be able to figure ot why one should get it for their crime while the next gets life instead -or often times FAR less. If it were handed down uniformly, fairly, and swiftly ( there is no deterent in having a sentence/punishment like the death penalty take a life time to be handed down) then it may be more readily accepted. Until that time I am a fence sitter on the issue.

Not so sure what your point was re: George Washington but I would assume that he had a proverbial 'Death Sentence' on his head - till he won the revolution.

[LaoPo]

Useless thread. Done before and leads nowhere.

No positive input on Thailand.

LaoPo

[suiging]

In THAILAND, I am firmly agaist it. The justice system is so flawed that the innocent need time to appeal, and the guilty enter a form of living hel_l which is a Thai prison and their just reward.

Europe................naaaaa, hang em.

[JR Texas]

Useless thread. Done before and leads nowhere.

No positive input on Thailand.

LaoPo

JR Texas: I oppose the death penalty for several reasons:

1) mistakes can and have been made (in my own country, the USA, the Supreme Court has ruled that at least 30 innocent people have been put to death),

2) it does not prevent crime (do we really need more evidence),

3) it is barbaric and beneath us as a species, and

4) if punishment is what people are after, my guess is that living in prison for life would be worse than death.

[PhilHarries]

This was done a while back and it looks to be going the same way this time.

I'd support the death penalty for crimes such as murder, rape and paedophilia, but voted no. The reason being I don't trust the legal system not just in Thailand but worldwide. As has been said even in the UK, where we supposedly have one of the best systems in the world, the rules get bent and important evidence/testimony gets lost or "overlooked" in the interests of the clear up rate.

Drug smuggling is an interesting one though. In general the folks that get busted smuggling drugs are merely hapless mules duped into it by the drugs gangs. If the big time drugs barons could be nailed then yes, slot the b@st@rds, I'd be first in line to pull the lever or whatever.

It could be argued that pushing drugs is a worse crime than murder. With murder the victim dies but with drugs the victim (user) is subject to a life of misery and pain. But against that the user gets into drugs of his/her own free will.

I suppose it comes down to the consideration is it better ten guilty men live than one innocent man dies?

[November Rain]

Firstly, I don't think most of us have any right to "agree" or "disagree" with the Thai laws, as it is not our country, we can't vote etc etc.

In general, though, I don't support the death penalty. For the simple reason that sometimes the wrong people are convicted. I would far rather have a thousand guilty men serving their lives in jail than one innocent man killed. Obviously, then, I voted "no"

[bkkrox]

The death penalty has never worked as a deterrant to crime. The U.S is a perfect example of its failure.

The very "logic" of it,i.e you must not kill anyone,ever,if you do we will kill you,is flawed.

Morally,disallowing redeption and the oppurtunity for the offender to try to rectify his/her wrongs.....or even just to allow them to live to realise the severity of their crime,and live with the guilt, seems a better way to me.

[mr_hippo]

Useless thread. Done before and leads nowhere.

No positive input on Thailand.

LaoPo

JR Texas: I oppose the death penalty for several reasons:

1) mistakes can and have been made (in my own country, the USA, the Supreme Court has ruled that at least 30 innocent people have been put to death),

How many guilty ones have been found innocent and have gone on to commit further crimes?

2) it does not prevent crime (do we really need more evidence),

No one who has been executed has committed further crimes, have they?

3) it is barbaric and beneath us as a species, and

And murder isn't?

4) if punishment is what people are after, my guess is that living in prison for life would be worse than death.

55555, three square meals a day, no money worries, recreation, no medical bills - need I go on?

[JR Texas]

Useless thread. Done before and leads nowhere.

No positive input on Thailand.

LaoPo

JR Texas: I oppose the death penalty for several reasons:

1) mistakes can and have been made (in my own country, the USA, the Supreme Court has ruled that at least 30 innocent people have been put to death),

How many guilty ones have been found innocent and have gone on to commit further crimes?

2) it does not prevent crime (do we really need more evidence),

No one who has been executed has committed further crimes, have they?

3) it is barbaric and beneath us as a species, and

And murder isn't?

4) if punishment is what people are after, my guess is that living in prison for life would be worse than death.

55555, three square meals a day, no money worries, recreation, no medical bills - need I go on?

JR Texas: Thanks for the comments Mr Hippo. It is fascinating how core beliefs shape us and guide our decision making. I trust that you are sane...some people would argue that I am also sane...ha ha ha. And yet our beliefs widely differ on this issue.

[mr_hippo]

There will always be the pros and cons of this or any other debate. I cannot and will not try to convert you and no matter what reasoned argument that you put forward will not convert me.

[Jet Gorgon]

This is a difficult question.

I am staying in Vanc at the mo, and a suburban pig farmer is on trial for killing six women, and charged with the murder of 26, most of whom were prostitutes on skid row. (There are so many websites and stories, just google pickton trial Vancouver.)

The details are horrific and worse than anything Hollywood could conjure up with a cast of inbred hillbillies wielding chainsaws to carve up young chicks. The prob is, the man is a simpleton, and many doubt he could have masterminded the murders. Biker gang snuff movie victims? Brother involved?

I'm with Phil on this. I think the death penalty is justified in extreme cases, but our judicial systems are in disarray. How to judge? Mind, being wimpy Canada, this guy will probably get a sentence of 20 hours of community service.

[canuckamuck]

There is no perfect justice system, criminals lie, lawyers manipulate, police cover things up and save face, Judges act politically. This will always be the case.

But I still think cops should have bullets in their guns, Judges should be allowed to make hard decisions, and people need lawyers to defend and prosecute.

Besides the Pickton case in Canada, we have another guy in jail, Clifford Olsen that confessed to raping and killing 13 kids, and later tried to sell the information about the locations of the bodies. He was also a serial rapist of young inmates during an earlier prison term. He is due to be released in the next few years. Canadian justice eh?

I think there are cases like this where the death penalty should naturally apply. I believe judges have the ability to determine beyond a shadow of a doubt when death is a reasonable penalty.

The death penalty is a perfect deterrent; as no one who has ever received it has committed any other crimes. It is the only possible deterrent for a psychopath.

[garro]

When I lived in Riyadh in Saudi Arabia they would hold weekly public executions on fridays in 'chop-chop' square. These public executions would be very well attended. People on their way to these executions would have a look of excitement and glee on their faces and I have seen similar expressions on people outside prisons in the US where executions are taking place. I found this blood-lust sickening. I see no difference between these execution groupies and other death penalty supporters around the world. What a sad world we live in.

[lburry]

I note your location as Oklahoma. That is in the US but is it on the same planet I inhabit?

I fear you are confusing conditions in the so-called "country club" prisons with the living

conditions of the average joe-soap prison inmate.

I don't really know where to start with you.

Incarceration should be about punishment not reform.

OK. If a "felon wants reform" he should be chained whilst performing slave labor ?

You saw "Cool Hand Luke" and you identified with the "sleepy eyed psychotic"

prison boss maybe ?

OK provocation over.

Would you not agree that there is a middle road here which would permit incarcerated

felons to earn cigarette and candy money plus a certain amount of self-respect (I do

believe there are certain inmates who have never experienced a normal work

environment) and at the same time permit the state to alleviate the cost of incarceration ?

I should add as a disclaimer that I have NO experience with penal systems anywhere

(not yet anyway).

PS Aren't convicted felons denied the vote in the US ?

"Cool Hand Luke" was simply a Hollywood movie created for entertainment. I won't pretend to be an expert on life inside a prison. I've never been there nor is it my intention to do so.

My primary point is that (IMHO), only a higher authority can take life. To do so, even in the name of society's laws, is to place ourselves at the same level of the convicted killer. No authority on this earth should be allowed to take a human life. But we, as a group of "civilized persons" can decide punishment to police our own group of citizens who cannot live within the expected rules. And for the convict who commits heinous crimes, he/she should be chained while performing slave labor.

Too many groups have decided to reform prisoners to prepare them for life after incarceration. But every report that I've read indicates that the majority of time, it fails. A convicted felon statistically repeats him/herself after release.

They should not be allowed to "earn" cigarette or candy money. Those are luxuries. They should be performing unpleasant and punishing duties to pay for their stay at the prison. For example, inmate labor can be used to build sand bag dams during an impending flood.... cut trees and clear rubbish after a natural disaster.... clean highways.... clean out septic tanks at government owned campgrounds, paint and clean properties that are owned by the tax paying citizen, etc, etc. Many times, these duties are performed by a contractor or the state militia and paid with tax dollars. The inmates should be earning (with sweat labor) those three meals each day and the cot they sleep on.

Did I mention that air conditioning is a luxury too? <LOL>

If the inmate wants reform, then he/she can seek it out with hard work after release from prison.... the same way that the honest minimum wage earner works and budgets to attend night school for self-improvement.

I'm getting further off topic now but perhaps reform of a corrupt group of egotistical attorneys and politicians? The legal system is a toy that is dissected in their playground, the court room. I recall reading an article a few years back where inmates in a state of California prison sued the state because they were fed creamy peanut butter instead of crunchy. Maybe that was the country club you referred to?

About voting rights, I'm no expert here but I *think* within the United States, each state determines if they can or cannot vote.